Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Curtis, Gary N. "Logical Fallacies: The Fallacy Files". Archived from the original on 2015-10-01; Damer, T. Edward (2009). Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-free Arguments (6th ed.). Wadsworth. ISBN 9780495095064. Archived from the original on 16 November 2016
In logic and philosophy, a formal fallacy [a] is a pattern of reasoning rendered invalid by a flaw in its logical structure. Propositional logic, [2] for example, is concerned with the meanings of sentences and the relationships between them. It focuses on the role of logical operators, called propositional connectives, in determining whether a ...
A fallacy is the use of invalid or otherwise faulty reasoning in the construction of an argument [1] [2] that may appear to be well-reasoned if unnoticed. The term was introduced in the Western intellectual tradition by the Aristotelian De Sophisticis Elenchis .
An Euler diagram illustrating the association fallacy. Using the language of set theory, the formal fallacy can be written as follows: . Premise: A is in set S1 Premise: A is in set S2
Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-free Arguments [1] is a textbook on logical fallacies by T. Edward Damer that has been used for many years in a number of college courses on logic, critical thinking, argumentation, and philosophy. It explains 60 of the most commonly committed fallacies.
A faulty generalization often follows the following format: The proportion Q of the sample has attribute A. Therefore, the proportion Q of the population has attribute A. Such a generalization proceeds from a premise about a sample (often unrepresentative or biased), to a conclusion about the population itself. [3]
One must try to identify faulty reasoning in the opponent's argument, to attack the reasons/premises of the argument, to provide counterexamples if possible, to identify any fallacies, and to show why a valid conclusion cannot be derived from the reasons provided for his/her argument.
The questionable cause—also known as causal fallacy, false cause, or non causa pro causa ("non-cause for cause" in Latin)—is a category of informal fallacies in which the cause or causes is/are incorrectly identified.